S.Ravindran v. Travancore Titanium Products Ltd.
Case brief
What is this about?
This court examined a writ petition challenging the processing of a tender for acid storage tank. Counsel for respondents clarified that all bids, including the petitioner's, were opened and being processed. The court held the challenge premature and closed the petition.
What did the court decide?
The court closed the writ petition as the challenge to the invitation of bid and consequential action was premature.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JANUARY 2018 / 21ST POUSHA, 1939
WP(C).No. 467 of 2018
PETITIONER(S):
S.RAVINDRAN S/O.SUBBAYYAN, AGED 52 YEARS, PROPRIETOR, SUBBAYYA ENGINEERING WORKS, TC.78/4630, NEAR ALL SAINTS COLLEGE, BEACH P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADVS.SRI.G.SUDHEER
SMT.N.P.ASHA
RESPONDENT(S):
1. TRAVANCORE TITANIUM PRODUCTS LTD. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, KOCHUVELI P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695021.
2. THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER (COMMERCIAL) TRAVANCORE TITANIUM PRODUCTS LTD., KOCHUVELI P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695021.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging the invitation of bid and processing of tender is maintainable when the bids have already been opened and are being processed.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to a declaration regarding entitlement to have his tender processed under Article 226 jurisdiction.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
S.RAVINDRAN S/O.SUBBAYYAN
- respondent
TRAVANCORE TITANIUM PRODUCTS LTD.
- respondent
THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER (COMMERCIAL) TRAVANCORE TITANIUM PRODUCTS LTD.
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court